3 ms·

>The number of automatic weapons dropped through the floor. Do you have any numbers on this? As far as I know Australia had almost no automatic weapons prior t

>The number of automatic weapons dropped through the floor. Do you have any numbers on this? As far as I know Australia had almost no automatic weapons prior to this buyback. >There have been no mass killings without automatic weapons (they're kind of necessary). This is just not true. Automatic weapons are very rarely (never?) used in mass killings. I think you are confusing semiautomatic (pull the trigger and one bullet is fired) and automatic (pull the trigger and bullets continue to shoot).

olliej 4y ago
As I said in my other reply, to the majority of people, and especially in the context of gun control, the distinction between fully and semi automatic isn’t relevant, the relevant bit is the “automatic” part of the description, which you’ll note is present in both descriptions. Sorry for being petulant but I’m tired of people defending americas failed response to gun violence with claims that gun control does nothing, when literally every other country that said enough was enough, introduced strict gun control and had immediate reduction, even complete cessation, in mass killings. Yes gun control doesn’t solve all problems, but that’s like saying seatbelts are pointless because they don’t save you if you die when the handbrake fails and the car crushes you into a wall.
- _-david-_ 4y ago
  If somebody has no clue what they are even talking about (difference between semiautomatic and automatic) it is hard to take their arguments seriously. It doesn't really matter if a gun ban could save every single life. Gun owners in the US won't give up their guns. In other countries it is possible to restrict the right, but it is too enshrined in American culture. If there was a serious attempt to ban guns there would either be civil war or secession of a large number of states. It is just not going to happen so talking about it is irrelevant.

olliej 4y ago

As I said in my other reply, to the majority of people, and especially in the context of gun control, the distinction between fully and semi automatic isn’t relevant, the relevant bit is the “automatic” part of the description, which you’ll note is present in both descriptions. Sorry for being petulant but I’m tired of people defending americas failed response to gun violence with claims that gun control does nothing, when literally every other country that said enough was enough, introduced strict gun control and had immediate reduction, even complete cessation, in mass killings. Yes gun control doesn’t solve all problems, but that’s like saying seatbelts are pointless because they don’t save you if you die when the handbrake fails and the car crushes you into a wall.

_-david-_ 4y ago
If somebody has no clue what they are even talking about (difference between semiautomatic and automatic) it is hard to take their arguments seriously. It doesn't really matter if a gun ban could save every single life. Gun owners in the US won't give up their guns. In other countries it is possible to restrict the right, but it is too enshrined in American culture. If there was a serious attempt to ban guns there would either be civil war or secession of a large number of states. It is just not going to happen so talking about it is irrelevant.